octave

But my question is, and forgive my naivety, is the only way forward to cancel and redo the election process merely to end up in the same situation but many thousands of dollars poorer?

So is the only remedy to cancel the election because it was called under the new rules a few days or weeks before the change of structure and then because the structure is now valid recall the election, call for candidates again, post out new voting forms most likely with exactly the same candidates. Sounds expensive.

What you actually said earlier was I am yet to be convinced that they or any candidate has refused to "answer any more questions" without supporting evidence this is just an empty assertion unless you have directly asked a question an not received an answer. Do you apply these assertions all candidates or just the 5? Thanks for posting one sentence from each of these 5 candidate statements but I have already read the statements from every candidate. As for your questions You seemed to be a little confused about the appropriate people to ask these questions to. These are perfectly fair questions of a current board member who presumably has access to the information required to accurately answer these questions but as far as I know, being a candidate does not entail a thorough briefing about the current situation. To put it more simply, if you or I had thrown our hats into the ring and stood for election by what process would we have the information required to accurately to answer these questions? Do you think that declaring ones candidacy entails a briefing or even access that is greater than that provided to any other member. I have absolutely no problem with you asking these questions but if you truly want answers you need to direct these questions to those in a position to actually provide accurate answers. In terms of referring to your posts as trollish, I would rather not have used that term in retrospect because I loathe name calling so I withdraw that BUT let me explain why I have a problem with your posts. You make plenty of assertions about people's character without offering any evidence, just because you think someone is a liar or corrupt it doesn't automatically make it true. You seem to think that you are able to pronounce on the motives of some people who are standing for the board. We would all like to think that we can analyse people we have not met or had any contact with but without evidence it is nothing more than your angry thoughts. To be clear I have no problem whatsoever with members who don't like the new RAAus structure or any particular board member past present or future I just wish that our debate could be civilized, rational and intelligent. I would urge all members to read all available information and contact candidates if necessary and to vote for whoever you think will do the best job.

For goodness sake Phil your are assertion that they have "chosen not to answer anymore questions" requires substantiation. Can I ask you directly, have you asked a question and failed to receive an answer?????? If I ask a question are you saying that I will not receive an answer? If I do ask a question and can prove that I got an answer, will you retract your assertion? I suspect you are just trolling, perhaps fun you, but it does detract from the usefulness of this forum.

Phil , you say they don't want scrutiny but have you actually attempted to directly scrutinize them? Are you saying that the only way to put oneself forward for a board position is via this particular forum? You seem to know so much about their motives that I assume you must either know these people or have contacted them. I would suggest that until we stop using statements like Meglamaniac (sic) f---wit? (as one poster did until I pointed it out and they edited it) liars, should be locked up, I know something bad but I can't say, some of these things said by anonymous posters, then I don't blame any candidate for not posting on this site. Perhaps if the standard of conversation were more intelligent, rational and polite candidates would use this site more. Phil when I search through your postings I can find nothing that contributes to the debate. Perhaps if as a concerned non member you would like to have your burning questions answered feel free to send me your questions and I will ask them and then publicly post the answers.

Public disclosure of what? Of course the statement by each candidate is not detailed, there is a contact form, you could ask questions. But I am not lobbying for any particular member, all I am saying is people (members) should do their research, make the effort and contact the candidates, ask questions and then vote. Complaining is fine by me, but without action is just ineffectual whinging. We can only vote for candidates that had the courage to put themselves forward. Those who complain the loudest COULD have put themselves forward but have not.

You say they are not volunteering are saying that they wont answer emails? Have you asked questions and not received answers?

That is rather a harsh a nasty assessment of people you presumably have never met, can I ask you if you have emailed any of the candidates and asked questions? Or are you somehow able to discern these candidates motives and attributes? Is anyone who stands for the new board a Meglamaniac (sic) f---wit?

DWF this is the most constructive post on RA Aus governance issues for quite sometime (in my opinion). - Thanks

I can report that the original poster (my bro in law) did eventually choose a flying school and is now a regular flyer. Although he lives in a different state to me we do get together at least once a year for a week of cross country flying adventures.

Just found this interesting article Let it go, people | Flight Safety Australia

I think the problem of passengers retrieving their carry on luggage before evacuating may be a well known phenomenon. I recall reading a fascinating book many years ago call Aircraft Detective by Stephen Barlay in 1969 (I think). This book detailed the early history of air crash investigation, including great stories about the investigator who spent weeks breaking warning light bulbs to see if he could detect whether a warning light was illuminated or not at the moment of impact. Anyway I recall there was a chapter about evacuating aircraft, it suggested that there are 3 types of passenger reactions during an emergency. The first type will flee ASAP even if it means climbing over other passengers, the second type will calmy follow instructions, the third type will either do nothing but maybe sit and stare or will go about their business as if nothing is wrong. I think this is referred to as "negative panic" I believe it has to do with the brain trying to protect itself by not defining the situation as an emergency. I imagine that once one passenger starts rummaging around for their cabin luggage that others then interpret the situation as not being an emergency. It is important to recognize the physcology of these situations rather that just assuming that it is only dumb people who do this and that perhaps there may by design fixes (like being able to centrally lock overhead storage, as some else suggested). I suspect "negative panic" also could be a factor (in our type of flying) given instances of unsuccessful landings after engine failures. This quote is from the site "Ask The Pilot" "like you, I found myself shaking my head when I saw the videos or read reports of people taking their carry on luggage off the plane. Then I interviewed a passenger on Asiana 214 [the 2013 crash-landing of a 777 in San Francisco] who had done so and was surprised by his explanation. He told me that when the plane came to a stop and the evacuation began, he acted by habit in gathering his things and only afterward did he realize what he was doing. So I think we cannot discount the effect of altered state of consciousness as playing a role in this behavior. You may have read about this as a form of “negative panic.”

Email from RAAus and on RAAus site

[ I watched his entire nomination acceptance speech, live, no editing no spin, just the mans words.

Kieth I am cautious of what everyone says. I am not overly impressed with "I know something but can't say" I am not sure what it is I am supposed to do with this "secret warning"???? When will this information be public? Should I not purchase an aircraft at the moment because RA Aus is about to collapse? You may well be right but uncertainty is bad for everyone including flying schools and aircraft manufacturers. Surely those who "know" can at least give a little hint as to whether this is some small governance problem that will be overcome or whether we are looking at total collapse.

Ian, can I respectfully suggest that what you are saying is that we should not put blind faith in the board or Don because presumably they are lying or concealing the truth about some impending doom but you ARE asking us to put blind faith in YOU because you know some terrible truth that the rest of us do know. Now I don't personally know you or Don or any board member so I can't possibly tell who has the correct information I can take the Board's view or your view, but either way it is on blind faith. Nothing winds me up more that the old "if you knew what I knew, but I can't tell you what I know" line. You have to admit that you are asking people to take what you are saying on blind faith. If this knowledge is known by a few then why can't you tell me in a private message which I promise I wont divulge, but at least I could then spread the word that there are bad things happening without actually giving details.

Yes Turbs I understand all of that. If this is a problem (and I genuinely haven't made up my mind on that) then the culprits are not those Asians. My understanding is that foreign buyers are supposed to apply to buy real estate The Purchase of Australian Property by Foreign Residents | Exfin - The Australian Expatriate's Gateway My argument is not specifically about real estate it was actually in answer to Bex's question "could anyone demonstrate anything racist that Hanson had said" Now I was extremely careful not to throw around the R word but I suggested it was a rather dumb thing to say. Firstly as I just noted these sales are supposed be vetted by the Foreign Investment Review Board. If there is a problem then this is where it lies. If they are not doing a good job then perhaps she could have called for an enquiry into the Foreign Investment Review Board. According to the Foreign Investment review Board the top ten buyers by nationality are: China $12,406m USA $6,135m Singapore $4,303m Canada $2,945m Malaysia $2,038m UK $1,795m Netherlands $1,720m NZ $1,362m Hong Kong $1,279m Germany $1,169m South Korea $1,083m Where Australia’s international property buyers come from - realestate.com.au Why doesn't Hanson mention Americans, Germans, British, New Zealanders etc? I have three problems with her statement. - It is not universally accepted that foreign buyers are the major driver of price rises in real estate. I read an article that suggested that a bigger pressure on prices is lack of new land availability. I have no idea whether this is true, partially true or false, I don't know but we should find out before pointing the finger at one group of people. - When asked whether Asians were Australians as well, she (Hanson) said “are they? My Asian friends, some born overseas but now Aussie citizens and some born here are quite rightly offended and so would I be. I don't see why they should be called upon to prove their Australianness. - Most disturbingly though is that whatever she personally believes the message some may take from this is that if you are struggling to buy a house (which is difficult in a capital city) then these are the people to blame, don't worry about issues such as land availability, the concentration of populations, urban density, property investors from countries where they don't look different to us etc. I think Hanson has the right to say whatever she wants to but also her detractors have the right to say whatever they like. I do think it is rather unhelpful to throw around the term racist except in the worst cases, I would much rather that she be challenged on the evidence.

Yes understand that and I am not sure what I think about foreign purchases, I am not sure whether I see this a s a problem or not, bad for Australian buyers but I suppose great for Australian sellers. She does say - specifically Asians. Not Germans, Americans, Canadians etc. but I suppose these people don't look disturbingly different!By the way I would be the first to admit that I am not particularly knowledgeable about the housing market but I am not necessarily convinced about the narrative that housing is unaffordable because of .... Asians. By the way The great Australian property myth One Nation 566,989 votes (4.3%) The Greens 1,121,804 vote (8.4%) just saying! Oh, just doing a bit of research, haven't quite digested all the info here, but it looks like foreigners do have to get permission to buy a residential property "Note that foreign investors intending to buy real estate in Australia have relatively open access to the Australian market and mortgage finance, with mortgages up to 70% of the property value typically available, but they must seek prior approval from the Government through the Foreign Investment Review Board (FIRB) unless specifically exempted by the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Regulations." The Purchase of Australian Property by Foreign Residents | Exfin - The Australian Expatriate's Gateway The fact that according to the above, foreigners must seek prior approval from the Foreign Investment Board would suggest to me that they indeed are identified. If this is correct then I would suggest that Hanson is either woefully uninformed or is trying to incite fear.

4.1% Yep I agree with you, it is much easier to just challenge her on grounds of rationality and facts. Personally from my point of view, the more she is out there expressing her opinion, the better. It doesn't make it easier for ME to understand. If I go to a doctor or a flying instructor I want them to be intelligent and qualified. I don't necessarily have a problem with having restrictions around people from overseas buying property in Aus (but I haven't put in the research to come up with a RATIONAL view) but this is not what Hansen said. She said 'Look at your housing, every time you go to an auction in Melbourne it's lined up full of Asians and Australians can't even get foot in the door to buy houses in their own country,'There's no identification,' she said. No identification...... what does that even mean??? Now perhaps you are right and she is not referring to overseas Asian buyers, but she did not make that clear. and I am not sure if her supporters are drawing that distinction.

Muslim leaders including the Grand Mufti of Australia back fatwa against Islamic State - Board of Imams Victoria Muslims Around The World Condemn Charlie Hebdo Attack Muslims Condemn Terrorist Attacks I think they probably do but noone is listening. I do understand the the psychology of this because I feel it myself, an atrocity is committed, we can't express our justifiable anger to ISIS because they are not listening so we look for the next best person to blame. I can see that leaders in the Islamic community have more responsibility in their public statements but I know my friend Azedeh who (as far as I know is not a practising Muslim ) feels pressure to constantly apologize. I wonder if as males we should apologise for the huge number of domestic violence incidents and murders of women by their male partners, do we speak out enough about what our male brothers do?

In what way has it been taken away Hansen has the right to say what she is saying BUT criticizing her is not curtailing her freedom of speech. I am perfectly happy for Hansen to articulate her views but it is ridiculous to complain when people challenge her. Since we don't need to be PC anymore, just let me say that I think Hanson is not articulate or intelligent. I also think that many of her supporters are people who are frustrated about how their lives are going and need someone to blame, if only those Asians weren't buying houses maybe I could buy one. I am sure Mark you wont agree but I am also confident that you would passiontley defend my right to express my opinion free of right wing or left wing political correctness.

to be a little more specific this > "Melbourne it’s lined up full of Asians and Australians can’t even get foot in the door to buy houses in their own country,” It is no easier for someone who is born in Asia or born in Australia than it is for a white Australian to buy property. It is called capitalism and people who work and earn money are equally able to buy property, I see no problem in that.

Sorry but I have some very close Asian friends, one of them did recently buy a a house and a business premises, their comment when they read this was "what sort of identification should they have?" Perhaps a red star on sewn on their shirt? Whether this is racist or not is not the point to me, it is just plain dumb. I was born in Britain and I bought a house is that a problem? I know Italians who own shops and houses, is that a problem?

Yes I fully understand that the membership fee has increased. From my point of view there has been no decrease in what I get from it. I actually feel better informed than I used to, I can watch a stream of the AGM, unlike letters I find I actually read emails, there is heaps of information on the RA Aus site etc. As I am sure you know about two years ago RA Aus was in an awful state with the antiquated state of it's registration system. As you would also know and perhaps even have personal experience of, many aircraft were grounded. It seems to me that this problem was always going to be costly to fix. I could be wrong but as far as I can see it has been fixed. Now it is perfectly reasonable to question whether the problem was fixed in the most efficient way or whether RA Aus should reduce its reserves in order to lower fees or continue to print a magazine. Perhaps in the next election someone will put themselves forward who can guarantee the return of the hard copy of the magazine, resume paper communication, reduce fees and perhaps even restore the board to the original number but to convince me they would have to present a compelling and financially sound case. Do we know how well it was read in the past? I can only speak for myself but I read it about as much as I ever did. I do understand that others will have a different view. I think that unless we can produce a magazine that makes a profit or at least can break even we have to decide how much we are willing to pay. I do not believe the important "communication has gone" but rather it's method of delivery has changed. I am in it for the flying, I joined AUF in 1988 and since then from my perspective things have improved, anyway that is just my perspective, I understand that not everybody's experience is as positive has mine.